1
00:00:03,950 --> 00:00:33,930
The following presentation of the Zoning Board of Appeals will begin in a moment. The Zoning Board of Appeals provides for an administrative review, interpretation or exception to the Zoning ordinance, and authorizes variances as defined in the Zoning ordinance and laws of the state of Michigan. This board consists of five members who are appointed by the city council. The city council may also appoint two alternate members. The Zoning Board of Appeals meets on the second Tuesday of every month at 6 p.m. and council chambers at City Hall.

2
00:00:33,930 --> 00:00:38,710
This presentation is provided by the MCTV Network, a service of the City of Midland.

3
00:00:39,170 --> 00:00:43,670
Replays of this meeting can be found on MGTV, Channel 188, on Charter's Spectrum.

4
00:00:44,150 --> 00:00:51,290
Through Channel 99 on AT&T Ubers, or on Demand at www.cityofmidlandmi.gov.

5
00:00:51,550 --> 00:00:56,130
Select meetings are available on MCTV Network's Government Affairs Podcast Channel.

6
00:01:06,500 --> 00:01:13,100
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the July 20th, 2021 meeting of the City of Midland zoning Board of Appeals.

7
00:01:13,100 --> 00:01:26,300
I'm Grant Merchal, the Director of Planning and Community Development, and I'd like to welcome everyone that's in the audience or those that are watching on midland government television channel that's found on cable television as well as now streaming on Apple TV and Roku.

8
00:01:26,720 --> 00:01:39,620
I'll go ahead and call this meeting to order. And before I actually turn it over to a chairman since it's after our beginning of the next fiscal year, I do have a little bit of information I want to provide related to the board itself.

9
00:01:39,620 --> 00:01:46,800
Usually the preamble that we give at the beginning and then from that will actually proceed through roll call and then the election of officers from there

10
00:01:47,480 --> 00:01:51,140
But the zoning board of appeals is a five member board that's appointed by the city council

11
00:01:51,140 --> 00:01:58,960
And it here's cases involving variances from the requirements of the city's zoning ordinance and cases such as interpretations of the language in the zoning ordinance

12
00:01:59,440 --> 00:02:05,220
The zoning board of appeals also has the authority to grant special approvals as specified within the zoning ordinance itself

13
00:02:05,740 --> 00:02:10,980
Most of the cases heard by the board involve variances either non-use or area and dimension

14
00:02:10,980 --> 00:02:11,800
in nature.

15
00:02:12,360 --> 00:02:16,660
An example of this type of variance would be to request to build a house or detach garage

16
00:02:16,660 --> 00:02:19,480
closer to the property line than what is otherwise permitted.

17
00:02:20,500 --> 00:02:24,880
There's other kinds of variances including the use variance and that type of variance results

18
00:02:24,880 --> 00:02:27,200
when a proposed use of a property is not allowed.

19
00:02:27,640 --> 00:02:31,040
An example of this would be a convenience store within an office service zone.

20
00:02:31,780 --> 00:02:36,440
A three-fifth vote of the entire board is required to approve non-use or area dimension

21
00:02:36,440 --> 00:02:42,200
variances as well as decisions on interpretations and special approvals and a four-fifth vote

22
00:02:42,200 --> 00:02:44,940
is in the entire board is required to approve a use variance.

23
00:02:45,700 --> 00:02:50,460
The board bases its decision for variances on specific criteria that are listed in the zoning

24
00:02:50,460 --> 00:02:52,580
ordinance and provided within the staff report.

25
00:02:53,240 --> 00:02:57,220
All decisions of the board are final and appeals of the decisions are made to circuit court.

26
00:02:57,220 --> 00:03:06,660
An important note to remember is that the variance cases that, that in variance cases the approvals are granted for the property and not granted for the property owner.

27
00:03:07,340 --> 00:03:15,500
If you do have any specific questions related to the zoning board of appeals and its functions, please reach out to the city planning department at 989-837-3374.

28
00:03:16,660 --> 00:03:18,620
And with that, I will do a roll call.

29
00:03:18,620 --> 00:03:21,200
All green.

30
00:03:21,780 --> 00:03:22,040
President.

31
00:03:22,920 --> 00:03:23,400
Erickson.

32
00:03:23,660 --> 00:03:23,920
President.

33
00:03:24,700 --> 00:03:25,020
Kyle.

34
00:03:25,260 --> 00:03:25,680
President.

35
00:03:26,260 --> 00:03:26,780
Danielson.

36
00:03:27,080 --> 00:03:27,260
Here.

37
00:03:27,760 --> 00:03:28,340
And me.

38
00:03:28,660 --> 00:03:28,880
Here.

39
00:03:29,880 --> 00:03:30,400
Okay.

40
00:03:30,760 --> 00:03:40,420
So since it is our new fiscal year and the new term of the board of appeals, we do have two officer elections that we need to do one for chair and one for vice chair.

41
00:03:41,000 --> 00:03:46,580
So for chair, I would entertain any nominations for recommendation of chair.

42
00:03:47,020 --> 00:03:47,320
I

43
00:03:53,300 --> 00:03:53,860
made Roy Green.

44
00:04:02,000 --> 00:04:04,300
Roy, do you have any concerns with that nomination?

45
00:04:04,820 --> 00:04:10,360
Okay, I'll actually ask for a second on that if you're okay.

46
00:04:10,740 --> 00:04:12,340
I support for that as well.

47
00:04:13,640 --> 00:04:16,880
All right, so that's motion by Danielson and

48
00:04:16,880 --> 00:04:21,840
support by Erickson to appoint Roy Green as chair.

49
00:04:23,100 --> 00:04:24,900
All in favor, signify by saying aye.

50
00:04:25,360 --> 00:04:25,580
Aye.

51
00:04:26,040 --> 00:04:26,760
I'll post him, sign.

52
00:04:28,560 --> 00:04:30,120
All right, that motion is approved.

53
00:04:30,660 --> 00:04:32,080
Mr. Green, you are a new chair.

54
00:04:32,240 --> 00:04:32,380
Right here.

55
00:04:33,040 --> 00:04:36,280
Now, with the next step in the agenda, this evening will be the appointment of the Vice

56
00:04:36,280 --> 00:04:36,640
Chair.

57
00:04:36,820 --> 00:04:39,500
Do I have a motion regarding someone for Vice Chair?

58
00:04:46,260 --> 00:04:48,020
Someone sort of underwhelming.

59
00:04:49,540 --> 00:04:52,160
Can the chair make a, through the procedure?

60
00:04:52,380 --> 00:04:55,660
If there isn't anyone else, Chairman, you can make a motion.

61
00:04:56,140 --> 00:05:00,220
In absence of any other motion, unless you'd like to, I would like to, I'm going to repeat

62
00:05:01,880 --> 00:05:02,320
All

63
00:05:06,960 --> 00:05:11,520
in favor of the motion to be guarding the vice chair.

64
00:05:11,760 --> 00:05:13,280
You're the answer to that by saying aye.

65
00:05:13,900 --> 00:05:14,040
Aye.

66
00:05:14,760 --> 00:05:16,280
Upon your names, the voice voted was approved.

67
00:05:16,620 --> 00:05:16,980
Thank you, Peter.

68
00:05:17,340 --> 00:05:18,060
Appreciate that.

69
00:05:25,140 --> 00:05:25,260
Ready?

70
00:05:25,780 --> 00:05:26,240
Go ahead.

71
00:05:26,320 --> 00:05:29,780
Next item on the agenda this evening are the approval of the minutes from the 20th of April.

72
00:05:30,380 --> 00:05:33,880
Meeting any questions or comments or corrections regarding those minutes in your packet?

73
00:05:37,080 --> 00:05:39,700
I mean, a move we accept the minutes is submitted.

74
00:05:40,180 --> 00:05:41,220
The motions are made to have support.

75
00:05:41,520 --> 00:05:41,860
Support.

76
00:05:41,860 --> 00:05:47,300
support. On favorite acceptance of the meeting minutes from the 20th of September, excuse me,

77
00:05:47,400 --> 00:05:49,060
20th of April, isn't it saying aye?

78
00:05:49,620 --> 00:05:49,900
Aye.

79
00:05:50,400 --> 00:05:55,560
unanimous voice vote, it's passed. Next item on the agenda will be the public hearing,

80
00:05:55,860 --> 00:06:01,440
two cases, just a brief review of the process of what we do. The first step of this public

81
00:06:01,440 --> 00:06:06,620
hearing process is that the staff will come to the podium and they will review the criteria

82
00:06:06,620 --> 00:06:11,040
which have been completed both by the applicant and also the review comments from the staff.

83
00:06:11,040 --> 00:06:17,440
At that time, members of the zoning commission may ask questions for clarifications, questions

84
00:06:17,440 --> 00:06:20,260
anything presented in the information pack that was given to us.

85
00:06:21,160 --> 00:06:25,960
After that, the applicant is asked to come forward to the podium, stating their name and

86
00:06:25,960 --> 00:06:32,100
their address, realizing the criteria that you completed are important part of the decision

87
00:06:32,100 --> 00:06:34,680
process and we encourage you to make additional comments.

88
00:06:35,660 --> 00:06:40,460
After that, this provided then any one additional support for their applicant and their

89
00:06:40,460 --> 00:06:45,080
application is asked to come forward, again, the same procedure, stating their name, and

90
00:06:45,080 --> 00:06:48,520
the reasons they feel that the variance request should be approved.

91
00:06:49,220 --> 00:06:55,520
After that, anyone in opposition is granted the opportunity to come forward, again, stating

92
00:06:55,520 --> 00:06:59,740
their name and their address, and the reasons why they feel that the petition should not

93
00:06:59,740 --> 00:07:00,420
be approved.

94
00:07:00,780 --> 00:07:07,900
So, that we close the public portion of the meeting, and then we make this emotion made in

95
00:07:07,900 --> 00:07:13,400
the affirmative regarding the decision, but prior to that, we have a fine definition

96
00:07:13,400 --> 00:07:19,980
of the findings of fact based on what we presented to us both in writing and this this evening

97
00:07:19,980 --> 00:07:23,360
is used in the findings of fact for the case.

98
00:07:23,800 --> 00:07:28,440
After the motion is made, the public hearing portion is closed, the next step will be the

99
00:07:28,440 --> 00:07:33,940
liberation by the commissioners based on this criteria, then the vote is taken and the decision

100
00:07:33,940 --> 00:07:36,400
is either made to approve or to deny the request.

101
00:07:36,400 --> 00:07:41,280
Right, would you please begin with case 21-10.

102
00:07:41,860 --> 00:07:42,100
All

103
00:07:44,240 --> 00:07:45,280
right, and thank you, Chairman.

104
00:07:45,540 --> 00:07:52,580
As indicated, the first petition this evening is by the applicant, David Dalker, for property located at 648 Lamber Road.

105
00:07:53,080 --> 00:08:02,800
The subject zoning of the property is RA2, single-family residential, and the proposal is to construct a home with exterior walls less than 20 feet in length.

106
00:08:04,770 --> 00:08:08,590
Taking a look at the subject site, it's highlighted here in yellow in the middle part of the screen.

107
00:08:09,130 --> 00:08:13,570
It's on the eastern side of Lambert Road, which runs north south to the center part of the image.

108
00:08:14,070 --> 00:08:17,810
It's actually on the very far outskirts of the city limits on the west end.

109
00:08:18,510 --> 00:08:26,370
Properties on the other side of Lambert are still within Homer Township, whereas this property and properties to the north and south and east are all within the city limits.

110
00:08:26,370 --> 00:08:43,020
It's zooming in on the site you can see from this aerial photograph back in 2020, the existing trailer home that's in the North South orientation with the driveway that connects on to Lambert Road.

111
00:08:43,540 --> 00:08:49,640
There is some accessory structures and then collection of different materials that are in the back portions of the site itself.

112
00:08:50,420 --> 00:08:57,700
It is immediately adjacent to some additional residences both to the North and to the Northwest that you see also here within that aerial photograph.

113
00:08:59,180 --> 00:09:04,340
When we look at the zoning of the site, we can see that this site is R-8-2 single-family

114
00:09:04,340 --> 00:09:08,300
residential and that applies to properties north, east, and south.

115
00:09:08,820 --> 00:09:12,240
Properties across the street since they are still in homer township are subject to the

116
00:09:12,240 --> 00:09:13,900
zoning laws of the township.

117
00:09:15,320 --> 00:09:19,040
Other zoning in the surrounding area does include the agricultural zoning district, which is

118
00:09:19,040 --> 00:09:21,020
the darker shade of grain highlighted on the map.

119
00:09:23,270 --> 00:09:27,550
On this image, I can also point out really just the broader orientation or kind of surrounding

120
00:09:27,550 --> 00:09:29,230
in context of this particular site.

121
00:09:29,850 --> 00:09:33,130
At least on Lambert Road, it is for this south resident

122
00:09:33,650 --> 00:09:36,530
before you get into property that is weathered wet

123
00:09:36,530 --> 00:09:37,170
in nature.

124
00:09:37,710 --> 00:09:41,410
That is due to the topography of the area.

125
00:09:41,870 --> 00:09:44,310
This is the floodplain of the Tittabawasi River

126
00:09:44,310 --> 00:09:46,330
that you see meandering its way through

127
00:09:46,330 --> 00:09:49,730
in the kind of middle part to this bottom part of the screen.

128
00:09:50,310 --> 00:09:51,830
And all of this land that's to the north

129
00:09:52,210 --> 00:09:56,990
being either open meadow or field as well as wooded area

130
00:09:56,990 --> 00:10:03,110
is property that is rather wet around the year and certainly during times of flooding.

131
00:10:03,770 --> 00:10:07,930
That's echoed by the next map that I'm going to show you, which is that 100-year floodplain map,

132
00:10:08,230 --> 00:10:13,950
which is going to be a particular note within this petition, because not only do we have the rules of the 100-year floodplain,

133
00:10:13,950 --> 00:10:20,450
which are shown in that light blue, we also have the rules of the purple regulatory area, which is the floodway.

134
00:10:20,450 --> 00:10:27,150
The floodway is designated as an area where the majority of the floodwaters flow during

135
00:10:27,150 --> 00:10:27,850
flooding events.

136
00:10:28,590 --> 00:10:34,390
So the extent of the blue section is conceivably where a 100-year flood would go as it relates

137
00:10:34,390 --> 00:10:39,410
to water expanding throughout the floodplain with the majority of that water moving its way

138
00:10:39,410 --> 00:10:40,470
through the floodway.

139
00:10:40,830 --> 00:10:45,970
There are different standards that the city applies to the 100-year floodplain and then

140
00:10:45,970 --> 00:10:49,690
there are the more restrictive standards that the Department of Environment, Great Lakes

141
00:10:49,690 --> 00:10:55,850
and energy, formerly the DEQ, that they apply at the state level when it comes to building

142
00:10:55,850 --> 00:10:57,550
within the flood wave itself.

143
00:10:58,530 --> 00:11:03,350
So even though this map doesn't continue that purple shade, by extension we do know

144
00:11:03,350 --> 00:11:07,490
that that continues and doesn't include this property, it's simply just the way that our

145
00:11:07,490 --> 00:11:10,430
GIS was pulled together with the data sets that were available.

146
00:11:14,730 --> 00:11:23,250
So the site itself, the site plan that had been submitted by the applicant is what you

147
00:11:23,250 --> 00:11:28,370
image of the structures itself within the city's GIS and that shows then that trailer house

148
00:11:28,370 --> 00:11:33,970
as well as those accessory structures on the property with that frontage being on Lambert

149
00:11:33,970 --> 00:11:42,770
Road, being 132 feet of frontage and a depth of 165 feet. So this is a little bit of a rectangle

150
00:11:42,770 --> 00:11:46,130
with dimensions of 132 by 165.

151
00:11:49,940 --> 00:11:56,040
This is a non-uneus variance which comes out of Article 29 of the

152
00:11:56,040 --> 00:11:59,540
granted, only upon finding that a practical difficulty exists.

153
00:12:00,060 --> 00:12:06,240
In order to do that, we do have the five criteria that's part of the review and I will go through each one of those in these next slides.

154
00:12:06,620 --> 00:12:15,540
First one being that strict compliance with restrictions governing areas set back frontage and other nonuse matters.

155
00:12:16,480 --> 00:12:23,300
Unresolutely prevent the owner from using the property for permitted purpose or will render ordinance conformity unnecessarily burdensome.

156
00:12:23,300 --> 00:12:36,020
The applicant points out that EGLE, the State Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy requires that he build within the floodplain or original 14 by 70 footprint of the home.

157
00:12:37,180 --> 00:12:44,380
So strict compliance with the city's 20 foot exterior wall minimum paired with the EGLE requirement essentially makes the property unbuildable.

158
00:12:45,780 --> 00:12:52,140
Stat points out that strict compliance with the ordinance will put the applicant out of compliance with the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy.

159
00:12:53,100 --> 00:12:56,960
requirements and between eagles, regulations, and city zoning, a house would not be able

160
00:12:56,960 --> 00:12:58,620
to be constructed on the property.

161
00:12:59,320 --> 00:13:02,600
This combination could be considered unnecessarily burdensome.

162
00:13:05,130 --> 00:13:09,650
The second criterion is how will the variance do substantial justice to the applicant as well

163
00:13:09,650 --> 00:13:10,690
as to other property owners?

164
00:13:11,150 --> 00:13:14,870
This applicant points out that the variance will allow him as the property owner to rebuild

165
00:13:14,870 --> 00:13:20,750
a home on the property which is adjusted afforded to other property owners within this same zoning

166
00:13:20,750 --> 00:13:21,090
district.

167
00:13:22,870 --> 00:13:28,210
That points out that the applicant is in the difficult position and that RA2 zoning does

168
00:13:28,210 --> 00:13:32,690
not permit the applicant to replace this trailer with another trailer, nor does it allow

169
00:13:32,690 --> 00:13:36,850
him to build a standard size house with walls that would be no less than 20 feet in width,

170
00:13:37,390 --> 00:13:43,570
and that approval of the variance will let the property owner construct a new home like

171
00:13:43,570 --> 00:13:46,430
justice that's given to other property owners in the same zoning district.

172
00:13:46,430 --> 00:13:47,410
For

173
00:13:50,360 --> 00:13:56,680
C, the variance requested is the minimum variance needed to provide relief to the applicant

174
00:13:56,680 --> 00:13:58,980
on a break consistent with justice to other property owners.

175
00:13:59,480 --> 00:14:03,560
Applicant points out simply that yes, the expectation from Eagle is that the home cannot

176
00:14:03,560 --> 00:14:06,120
be rebuilt larger than the 14 by 70 footprint.

177
00:14:06,740 --> 00:14:12,080
And so he cannot go larger than 14 on two of the exterior walls and he's requesting the

178
00:14:12,080 --> 00:14:16,640
minimum variance necessary to be in accordance with Eagle's requirements.

179
00:14:17,580 --> 00:14:21,680
A step points out that the applicant is seeking to comply with the requirements set by

180
00:14:21,680 --> 00:14:25,120
EGLE, and they're not seeking additional benefit other than EGLE compliance.

181
00:14:25,640 --> 00:14:27,920
And that this is considered the minimum variance needed.

182
00:14:30,970 --> 00:14:34,910
For D, what are the unique circumstances peculiar to the property, and that generally applicable

183
00:14:34,910 --> 00:14:38,570
in the area, or to other properties in the same zoning district, which would require the variance.

184
00:14:39,370 --> 00:14:46,090
Unique circumstance requires that the applicant's property is in the floodway, which is what

185
00:14:46,090 --> 00:14:50,490
That leaves him subject to such strict legal rebuilding requirements.

186
00:14:52,260 --> 00:14:59,860
That points out that any flood impacted homes in the serious zoning district that are in the flood wave would be subject to the same zoning, the same legal requirement.

187
00:15:00,300 --> 00:15:06,920
And the advantage that other property owners may have is that the size of their existing structure met all of the ordinance requirements.

188
00:15:10,640 --> 00:15:32,000
And lastly, the problem in resulting need for the grants has been created by strict compliance with the zoning ordinance. Not by the applicant or the applicant predecessors. The applicant points out that yes, in response to the dam failure and resulting flooding in 2020, it has been difficult to rebuild because he cannot comply with the city of Midland zoning ordinances, as well as the state's legal requirements at the same time.

189
00:15:33,780 --> 00:15:37,740
Staff points out on this one that staff cannot confirm if the trailer existed on the property

190
00:15:38,340 --> 00:15:42,140
prior to the applicant's ownership of the property, but we can say that this property

191
00:15:42,140 --> 00:15:46,740
was annexed into the city from Homer township over 25 years ago, which made its subject

192
00:15:46,740 --> 00:15:48,400
to Midlands ordinances at that time.

193
00:15:49,140 --> 00:15:53,440
The damage to the homeless dissolve of the catastrophic flood and not action by the property owner and

194
00:15:53,440 --> 00:15:57,260
the applicant cannot choose to be compliant with the zoning ordinance and be compliant with

195
00:15:57,260 --> 00:15:58,600
equals requirements at the same time.

196
00:16:03,040 --> 00:16:07,040
So with that, Sherman, it is a three-fourth vote to approve this petition.

197
00:16:08,020 --> 00:16:11,400
We have received one communication, which was included within the staff packet.

198
00:16:11,400 --> 00:16:17,520
That's an opposition to the request by a neighbor in property owner across the street to the northwest.

199
00:16:18,620 --> 00:16:20,480
And with that, I will entertain any questions.

200
00:16:21,000 --> 00:16:21,900
Any questions for staff?

201
00:16:22,780 --> 00:16:23,160
Peter?

202
00:16:23,380 --> 00:16:23,680
Yes, sir.

203
00:16:24,360 --> 00:16:25,920
Grant, do you mind going back to the floodway?

204
00:16:26,320 --> 00:16:26,460
Picture.

205
00:16:28,860 --> 00:16:32,300
I thought you said he's in the flood zone, but not in the floodway.

206
00:16:34,140 --> 00:16:42,560
So that again, I thought when you were mentioning this that he was in the 100 year flood zone area, but not in the floodway.

207
00:16:42,660 --> 00:16:43,840
The purple is the floodway.

208
00:16:43,980 --> 00:16:48,480
The purple is the floodway, but as you can see it had that abrupt north south stop.

209
00:16:49,120 --> 00:16:52,140
And that's simply just the way that the map has been generated.

210
00:16:52,320 --> 00:16:52,380
Okay.

211
00:16:52,480 --> 00:16:56,380
That floodway does continue all the way up through the flood plain itself.

212
00:16:56,380 --> 00:17:03,360
So, this does include this property and it heads off into the northwest area.

213
00:17:03,980 --> 00:17:04,520
Make sense.

214
00:17:04,820 --> 00:17:06,280
So, it is within the flood wave.

215
00:17:07,580 --> 00:17:08,000
Questions?

216
00:17:09,140 --> 00:17:10,040
Questions for staff?

217
00:17:11,320 --> 00:17:12,740
I have a question for Grant.

218
00:17:14,420 --> 00:17:16,240
Do you know if the property has been condemned?

219
00:17:17,780 --> 00:17:20,900
Of course, the house next to it had a annoying sticker on it.

220
00:17:21,260 --> 00:17:23,940
Yes, so I do know that this has gone through the substantial damage.

221
00:17:23,940 --> 00:17:29,360
For example, substantial improvement assessment and that's effectively determining if damages

222
00:17:29,360 --> 00:17:34,320
to the structure are at an excess of 50% of the value and it is an excess of 50%.

223
00:17:34,320 --> 00:17:36,940
So I know, I don't know if it's condemned, I don't believe it is.

224
00:17:37,060 --> 00:17:39,860
I know that it is a substantially damaged property though.

225
00:17:40,220 --> 00:17:44,900
Okay, and the other question is, is there any zoning regulations in home or township across

226
00:17:44,900 --> 00:17:45,340
the street?

227
00:17:46,080 --> 00:17:46,700
Are you aware of any?

228
00:17:47,480 --> 00:17:49,780
As it relates to property development.

229
00:17:49,780 --> 00:17:59,560
So I can say that Homer Township does participate in the National Flood Insurance Program, which they would have to apply those 100-year floodplain standards as well as the floodway standards.

230
00:17:59,840 --> 00:18:01,680
So those would be applicable on that side.

231
00:18:02,120 --> 00:18:06,980
And I do know that it is, there are zoning standards in Homer Township exactly what those are.

232
00:18:07,180 --> 00:18:10,360
I'm not sure, but they do zone and have regulation in that way.

233
00:18:10,500 --> 00:18:12,560
Okay. Any other questions for staff?

234
00:18:15,580 --> 00:18:19,920
Thank you very much Grant. We now have the applicant to come forward stating their name

235
00:18:19,920 --> 00:18:26,620
and the address. And again, the importance of this criteria to us in the deliberation

236
00:18:26,620 --> 00:18:28,640
and decision process.

237
00:18:29,540 --> 00:18:32,940
Yes, sir. My name is Dave Delker. I live at 648 Lambert Road.

238
00:18:33,280 --> 00:18:34,880
I used to live at 648 Lambert Road.

239
00:18:37,120 --> 00:18:40,480
And I'd just like to live back there, you know.

240
00:18:41,440 --> 00:18:43,820
I've lived there for almost 40 years, you know.

241
00:18:44,600 --> 00:18:47,640
I went through the flood of 86, 15, 17.

242
00:18:48,580 --> 00:18:50,780
None of that went in my house till it was damn broke, you know.

243
00:18:51,120 --> 00:18:53,520
And that's kind of why I want to rebuild, you know.

244
00:18:54,580 --> 00:18:58,540
Maybe not a trailer house, but, you know, I'll put a block foundation in

245
00:18:58,540 --> 00:19:01,420
and a stick built house on top of that, you know, 14 by 70.

246
00:19:02,180 --> 00:19:04,340
And that's all I'm asking for, you know.

247
00:19:05,160 --> 00:19:06,560
I can't afford to buy in a place.

248
00:19:06,720 --> 00:19:07,320
I'm in disability.

249
00:19:12,740 --> 00:19:18,140
I'll be out in the street here pretty soon if I don't find something and that's what I'm

250
00:19:18,140 --> 00:19:18,680
kind of asking.

251
00:19:21,000 --> 00:19:21,580
Yes, Peter.

252
00:19:21,780 --> 00:19:25,740
So, I'll question, so the foundation for the current house, there is a foundation that's

253
00:19:25,740 --> 00:19:26,840
14 feet by...

254
00:19:27,480 --> 00:19:28,000
There is no...

255
00:19:28,000 --> 00:19:28,700
Well, it's just blocked.

256
00:19:28,880 --> 00:19:29,620
Pears are blocked now.

257
00:19:29,880 --> 00:19:30,340
But I'll go for it.

258
00:19:30,340 --> 00:19:31,540
Put a register foundation in.

259
00:19:31,820 --> 00:19:35,780
So, if you put down a foundation that will be 14 feet.

260
00:19:35,780 --> 00:19:42,220
by 70 foot. So this is where I'm going to get a little confused on this. Why is it that you can't?

261
00:19:42,300 --> 00:19:47,480
Is it Eagles are saying that you can't go 20 feet? Yeah, I'm a little confused.

262
00:19:48,600 --> 00:19:53,660
You still have some eagle requirement that he can only be placed in the footprint that was going to be placed in the footprint.

263
00:19:53,660 --> 00:19:57,640
Okay. Yes. Because to me the footprint was the foundation. That's why I was thinking it that way.

264
00:19:57,960 --> 00:19:59,080
Okay. Thank you for answering that.

265
00:19:59,080 --> 00:20:00,540
All right, that's questions for the applicant.

266
00:20:00,960 --> 00:20:02,000
Yes, for the applicant.

267
00:20:02,040 --> 00:20:02,160
Right.

268
00:20:02,760 --> 00:20:08,520
In the past, your house has not received any water from the other plants.

269
00:20:09,300 --> 00:20:10,460
It didn't get inside my house.

270
00:20:10,540 --> 00:20:11,180
No, but it ruined everything.

271
00:20:11,360 --> 00:20:12,220
In my yard.

272
00:20:12,380 --> 00:20:14,280
It came up in your driveway in your yard and stuff.

273
00:20:14,460 --> 00:20:18,800
All my yard equipment and stuff was all really, all three times.

274
00:20:19,180 --> 00:20:20,420
And I replaced all of it.

275
00:20:20,820 --> 00:20:22,120
No help, a femur, nothing.

276
00:20:22,400 --> 00:20:23,020
Until this year.

277
00:20:23,720 --> 00:20:25,460
And I still haven't gotten help from that, really.

278
00:20:25,460 --> 00:20:32,260
I mean so I would assume that if you rebuild you would increase the height of it and oh yes

279
00:20:32,260 --> 00:20:38,860
I gotta raise in my house up I think seven inches I think is what it is from now. Have you considered putting a second story on them?

280
00:20:39,340 --> 00:20:44,040
Not at 14 by 70. No, I'm not just a regular 14 by 70

281
00:20:44,940 --> 00:20:49,180
You're more or less like a trailer house sitting there, but a stick built in on a foundation.

282
00:20:49,180 --> 00:20:49,300
question.

283
00:20:51,600 --> 00:20:58,140
I have a question for Grant. Now, why isn't that who says he can't put a different

284
00:20:58,140 --> 00:21:05,320
trailer in there? So it would be our zoning ordinance. So we have specific mobile home zoning

285
00:21:05,320 --> 00:21:10,460
districts and this is not one of those. So all right, all right, one, two, three, four zoning

286
00:21:10,460 --> 00:21:17,080
districts require foundation and stick building. In some cases, the module homes, but a trailer

287
00:21:17,080 --> 00:21:22,840
would have to go within a mobile home zoning district of the city, which is the R.D zoning

288
00:21:22,840 --> 00:21:23,200
district.

289
00:21:24,020 --> 00:21:24,460
Interesting.

290
00:21:25,020 --> 00:21:25,880
Any other questions?

291
00:21:26,540 --> 00:21:30,560
I have one for the applicant in the probably ranking comment on this, too, regarding the

292
00:21:31,340 --> 00:21:36,720
elevation of the new property, with the applicant go by the city regulations or EGLE, as far

293
00:21:36,720 --> 00:21:39,900
as the elevation for the new foundation out of the floodplain.

294
00:21:40,220 --> 00:21:41,740
So those would actually be one in the same.

295
00:21:42,160 --> 00:21:46,560
So his indication of having to raise at that seven inches, that's to put it one foot above

296
00:21:46,560 --> 00:21:51,300
the base blood elevation, which is 619 feet out there. So he'd have to have his lowest level finish

297
00:21:51,300 --> 00:22:01,160
floor at 620 feet. Okay. Those are the... Yes, go ahead. Is it possible to request an

298
00:22:01,160 --> 00:22:07,720
eco-ferience? Is there a process through thousands? You can do this. So they've allowed the six feet

299
00:22:07,720 --> 00:22:13,540
or the footprint would change? No, I don't know. It works. I could change it, you know, myself, you know,

300
00:22:13,540 --> 00:22:18,220
but because I actually had plans on putting a module or stick their

301
00:22:18,220 --> 00:22:21,980
hulls in it, you know, years ago until I got divorced, you know, that I went down the train, but

302
00:22:23,640 --> 00:22:25,360
we don't have that over yet.

303
00:22:25,460 --> 00:22:27,560
In the end, I've gone disability, so I'm really stupid.

304
00:22:28,300 --> 00:22:31,160
I guess the question is, is this a really any other option?

305
00:22:31,540 --> 00:22:34,640
You have to check with Ego to see what that would be an option.

306
00:22:35,260 --> 00:22:36,620
I don't think there is, is there?

307
00:22:38,400 --> 00:22:38,920
I can answer that.

308
00:22:38,920 --> 00:22:39,480
What's the process?

309
00:22:39,480 --> 00:22:52,220
So Eagle in short, so building new construction in the floodway is an extremely small regulatory allowance within the federal regulations that they're applying.

310
00:22:52,920 --> 00:23:03,940
Eagle's way to be able to accommodate existing homeowners like this is to do that footprint rule and that's what we've heard on a number of occasions that's all the flexibility that they're allowed to do.

311
00:23:03,940 --> 00:23:07,820
so that it doesn't change water flow or height and block water.

312
00:23:08,060 --> 00:23:09,060
It's part of another group.

313
00:23:09,920 --> 00:23:10,440
That's correct.

314
00:23:10,800 --> 00:23:10,940
Yeah.

315
00:23:11,280 --> 00:23:11,380
Yeah.

316
00:23:11,480 --> 00:23:11,580
Yeah.

317
00:23:11,580 --> 00:23:11,660
Yeah.

318
00:23:11,660 --> 00:23:11,740
Yeah.

319
00:23:11,740 --> 00:23:11,760
Yeah.

320
00:23:11,760 --> 00:23:11,860
Yeah.

321
00:23:11,860 --> 00:23:11,880
Yeah.

322
00:23:11,880 --> 00:23:11,960
Yeah.

323
00:23:11,960 --> 00:23:12,280
Yeah.

324
00:23:12,920 --> 00:23:17,000
similar rules to dealt with with a new compensation cut somewhere else for an equivalent

325
00:23:17,000 --> 00:23:17,360
outward.

326
00:23:17,900 --> 00:23:18,340
Yes.

327
00:23:19,260 --> 00:23:20,140
That's correct.

328
00:23:20,440 --> 00:23:21,040
That's correct.

329
00:23:21,300 --> 00:23:25,320
So they do allow, like if you're going to build new construction, just in the 100-year

330
00:23:25,320 --> 00:23:28,420
floodplain, not the floodway, but just the 100-year floodplain, that's when you can do

331
00:23:28,420 --> 00:23:32,480
the compensation cut to accommodate the floodplain volume elsewhere.

332
00:23:33,040 --> 00:23:35,320
The floodway does not allow for that to take place.

333
00:23:35,480 --> 00:23:36,420
So it is just that.

334
00:23:37,220 --> 00:23:37,620
Thank you.

335
00:23:38,020 --> 00:23:39,240
Any other questions for the applicant?

336
00:23:39,460 --> 00:23:39,540
No.

337
00:23:40,560 --> 00:23:42,220
We thank you very much for your presentation.

338
00:23:42,740 --> 00:24:07,870
Any one else in support of the applicant's presentation does make please come forward hearing none sing them will now go to any anyone in opposition to the applicants petition hearing none sing them will close the public portion of it and begin with the determination of the findings of fact who wishes to start.

339
00:24:07,870 --> 00:24:11,790
So Grant, do you have the list and the initial list you've been doing for the actual

340
00:24:11,790 --> 00:24:13,990
time you had to find where I wrote that down?

341
00:24:17,620 --> 00:24:18,060
Yes.

342
00:24:19,420 --> 00:24:22,360
So for our standard findings of fact, I do have the property.

343
00:24:22,480 --> 00:24:26,820
I just said 648 Lambert Road, the zoning of the subject property is RA2.

344
00:24:27,100 --> 00:24:30,880
The surrounding zoning is RA2 as well as home or township zoning.

345
00:24:31,520 --> 00:24:35,240
The speed limit on adjacent streets is 35 miles an hour.

346
00:24:35,880 --> 00:24:37,900
Number of comments in support would be zero.

347
00:24:37,900 --> 00:24:39,840
a number of comments in opposition would be one.

348
00:24:42,200 --> 00:24:49,760
The size of the subject property is that 132 by 165 I believe.

349
00:24:53,380 --> 00:24:58,560
And then the current use of the property is residential, although this structure is currently vacant.

350
00:25:02,900 --> 00:25:03,360
What's up, mine?

351
00:25:04,020 --> 00:25:05,920
The additional findings are fact we wish to add.

352
00:25:06,460 --> 00:25:07,200
If I may, Chairman?

353
00:25:07,460 --> 00:25:07,840
Yes, go ahead.

354
00:25:08,160 --> 00:25:12,020
So the foundation of the property needs to be raised to 620 feet.

355
00:25:12,020 --> 00:25:16,140
I was actually mistaken on those numbers, so I've got it written down here.

356
00:25:16,320 --> 00:25:20,320
So the base blood elevation in that area is actually 616 feet.

357
00:25:20,880 --> 00:25:21,180
Is that what?

358
00:25:22,420 --> 00:25:23,340
616 feet.

359
00:25:24,020 --> 00:25:28,620
And the new structure would need to be elevated to at least 617 feet.

360
00:25:28,860 --> 00:25:31,780
So the foundation must be raised to 617 feet.

361
00:25:32,980 --> 00:25:40,860
The applicant is here because of eagle requirement, which don't allow him to change the foundation

362
00:25:44,900 --> 00:25:53,540
He's requesting a variance to the 14 foot with not being 20 feet, but being only 14 feet to meet the Eagle requirements.

363
00:25:54,600 --> 00:26:01,700
And in this case, the Eagle requirements in the city of zoning do not match, so they're in conflict with each other.

364
00:26:02,420 --> 00:26:02,640
The

365
00:26:05,870 --> 00:26:07,430
property is in the floodway.

366
00:26:10,510 --> 00:26:11,910
The additional findings of fact?

367
00:26:12,270 --> 00:26:18,550
There's no reasonable likelihood of getting a variance from evil, so this is only option

368
00:26:18,550 --> 00:26:20,650
for the property if he wants to reside on it.

369
00:26:25,580 --> 00:26:29,140
Just a couple additional findings of fact, if I may add them to property, if we can, this

370
00:26:29,140 --> 00:26:34,480
is actually located in Midland and across the street is home or township, and we're not

371
00:26:34,480 --> 00:26:38,100
certain of the zoning regulations in home or township.

372
00:26:38,100 --> 00:26:45,520
The property was, that east side of the street was apparently acquired more than 25 years ago.

373
00:26:45,640 --> 00:26:54,940
Annex and to the city of Midland, there was one letter in opposition, no letters of support presented on the case.

374
00:26:55,800 --> 00:27:03,460
And the trailer is currently zero handed to a north-south orientation and it is not inhabited at this time.

375
00:27:03,460 --> 00:27:04,240
I

376
00:27:11,120 --> 00:27:14,020
want to read this back and base it sure, and we'll face it on the issue.

377
00:27:14,420 --> 00:27:15,200
I think that's pretty good.

378
00:27:15,520 --> 00:27:22,260
Yep, so in addition to the ones I had previously read off, it would be that the foundation

379
00:27:22,260 --> 00:27:28,220
must be raised to a minimum of 600 and 17 bs in here.

380
00:27:29,140 --> 00:27:29,740
Thank you.

381
00:27:31,700 --> 00:27:37,040
Eagle requirements are such that it must be an existing footprint which is that 14 by 70.

382
00:27:37,740 --> 00:27:42,380
the applicant is asking for a variance of six feet, which would be the difference between

383
00:27:42,380 --> 00:27:44,540
the 14-foot and the 20-foot minimum.

384
00:27:46,100 --> 00:27:51,000
The legal requirements and the zoning requirements are at odds with one another.

385
00:27:51,700 --> 00:27:53,560
The property is within the floodway.

386
00:27:54,440 --> 00:27:57,300
The likelihood of legal granting a variance is very unlikely.

387
00:27:58,720 --> 00:28:03,460
Property across the streets in homer township and applicable to the homer township zoning

388
00:28:03,460 --> 00:28:03,840
rules.

389
00:28:04,480 --> 00:28:08,880
property has been within the city limits for at least 25 years and the trailer is

390
00:28:08,880 --> 00:28:10,520
oriented north-south and currently bacon.

391
00:28:11,600 --> 00:28:15,980
Any other thing we added to that? With that we will close the public portion of the

392
00:28:15,980 --> 00:28:23,100
media now looking basically soliciting a motion regarding the applicant as far as

393
00:28:23,100 --> 00:28:28,640
again the motion is made in the affirmative regarding the approval of case number 21-10.

394
00:28:28,640 --> 00:28:30,160
You want us to make that motion, please?

395
00:28:31,000 --> 00:28:31,400
So moved.

396
00:28:32,040 --> 00:28:32,480
I have support.

397
00:28:33,660 --> 00:28:34,080
Second.

398
00:28:34,400 --> 00:28:34,540
Second.

399
00:28:35,300 --> 00:28:35,440
All right.

400
00:28:35,660 --> 00:28:44,080
The motion has been made and supported regarding the approval petition 20-10.

401
00:28:44,820 --> 00:28:51,600
If we have a new member, we're asked one of the three existing members to begin with the findings of fact as far as the analysis of those five criteria.

402
00:28:52,200 --> 00:28:53,060
Who wishes to start?

403
00:28:53,900 --> 00:28:54,560
I'm happy to start.

404
00:28:54,860 --> 00:28:55,060
Thank you.

405
00:28:55,060 --> 00:28:55,520
Peter, thank you.

406
00:28:55,820 --> 00:28:59,140
So what criteria A, how strict are the compliance?

407
00:28:59,660 --> 00:29:01,900
And is this unreasonable prevent them to use the property?

408
00:29:02,140 --> 00:29:05,720
And the answer is, to me it's very obvious that this is very much an unnecessary

409
00:29:05,720 --> 00:29:06,760
burdensome to him.

410
00:29:07,020 --> 00:29:12,060
He cannot comply when things are at odds between ego and the city.

411
00:29:13,160 --> 00:29:16,080
How does a variance do substantial justice to the applicant?

412
00:29:16,400 --> 00:29:18,780
Well, obviously it gets in the chance to actually build on the property.

413
00:29:20,180 --> 00:29:22,040
Does a variance request the minimum variance?

414
00:29:22,040 --> 00:29:29,580
It is he's only asking for exactly what the foundation was or the property structure was before nothing larger is the

415
00:29:29,580 --> 00:29:31,020
You can't get any less

416
00:29:31,860 --> 00:29:34,220
Of a chain change the mid of the variance on that one

417
00:29:35,200 --> 00:29:41,300
What's the unique circumstances peculiar to the property that's not generally applicable in the area or other properties in the same zoning district

418
00:29:42,360 --> 00:29:49,060
Well, this isn't a flood zones in the flood away. It's a very unique property. It's been there for a long time over 40 years

419
00:29:50,580 --> 00:29:53,320
He has the same advantage as the other property owners in the area.

420
00:29:54,980 --> 00:29:58,640
The problem in the resulting need for the variance has been created by strict compliance with

421
00:29:58,640 --> 00:29:59,380
the zoning ordinance.

422
00:29:59,380 --> 00:29:59,980
Thank you very much.

423
00:30:00,000 --> 00:30:05,320
The answer is yes. It really has been because of the zoning requirements of the City of Midland and Ego.

424
00:30:08,240 --> 00:30:29,980
Any additional comments regarding that? I'm sorry, but I'm sorry. Certainly, another a, I would say that there's a very limited use other than for a residence of this property due to zoning and due to the size of the property. I would also say under B that it's not his fault.

425
00:30:29,980 --> 00:30:33,340
or anything that was intentionally done, it was an act of God.

426
00:30:34,040 --> 00:30:38,160
I also would say that it would be my opinion that would increase the property value

427
00:30:38,520 --> 00:30:45,120
to have a stick-built home on the property versus the mobile home that was there prior to

428
00:30:45,120 --> 00:30:49,320
and would be a value and a benefit to the community in that area.

429
00:30:50,660 --> 00:30:54,440
And again, I would just concur with what Peter said on the remaining three items.

430
00:30:54,740 --> 00:30:55,500
Thank you very much.

431
00:30:58,340 --> 00:31:05,380
No additional comments. I just think the five criteria have been covered very well and

432
00:31:05,380 --> 00:31:13,260
I think that it's a perfect catch-22. I think that there's not much choice in this.

433
00:31:13,460 --> 00:31:22,520
I think that rebuilding in the footprint is the only option at this point. So I agree

434
00:31:24,240 --> 00:31:28,080
in terms of substantial justice to the applicant, the property owners.

435
00:31:28,300 --> 00:31:32,820
It's going to, as was planned out by Mr. Exxon, it's going to improve the value of the property.

436
00:31:34,240 --> 00:31:37,400
He's building houses just the same as are able to build a house and use it the same way.

437
00:31:37,540 --> 00:31:40,960
So it seems like I don't see any injustice to the neighbors in any way.

438
00:31:42,140 --> 00:31:42,260
Okay.

439
00:31:42,740 --> 00:31:45,440
My name is Comet, it's been already identified.

440
00:31:45,760 --> 00:31:48,000
My Peter's actually forgot a situation with the applicant.

441
00:31:48,000 --> 00:31:53,560
And this caught one organization, one government agency says you can do something, and the other

442
00:31:53,560 --> 00:31:54,020
can't.

443
00:31:54,100 --> 00:31:58,340
There's an on- make conflict in that, and it's not fair to the homeowner to be caught

444
00:31:58,340 --> 00:31:59,940
in that situation where you know when.

445
00:32:00,380 --> 00:32:05,900
It is unique situation where it's located, as far as unfortunately the many areas in

446
00:32:05,900 --> 00:32:11,160
middle and suffered the same of similar damage in the last may a year ago, obviously do substantial

447
00:32:11,160 --> 00:32:16,000
justice to the homeowner to get the chance to rebuild a facility at house where it's

448
00:32:16,000 --> 00:32:24,980
currently located, as far as the minimum obviously yes, the idea is to, you want to enlarge

449
00:32:24,980 --> 00:32:30,180
the exposure to any future water flooding in the area when that, when the nip that occurs.

450
00:32:31,140 --> 00:32:33,860
Obviously, there are some unique circumstances.

451
00:32:34,720 --> 00:32:39,960
It happens to be located in the floodway, but again, it's a properties where this class

452
00:32:39,960 --> 00:32:42,440
flat is R-E-2, this is R-E-2, that's not in the floodway.

453
00:32:42,440 --> 00:32:50,180
The problem resulting variance created by strict compliance, I think it's obvious, and I have no issue at all supporting the variance request.

454
00:32:50,480 --> 00:32:52,380
Would you please take a roll call to vote, please grant.

455
00:32:52,760 --> 00:33:00,960
Yes, so this is the motion by Eric Sinan and supported by Daniel Sin to approve petition number 21-10.

456
00:33:03,300 --> 00:33:03,780
Mead.

457
00:33:04,700 --> 00:33:05,180
Yes.

458
00:33:05,880 --> 00:33:06,460
Daniel Sin.

459
00:33:06,800 --> 00:33:06,940
Yes.

460
00:33:07,620 --> 00:33:07,860
Kyle.

461
00:33:08,180 --> 00:33:08,720
Kyle, yes.

462
00:33:09,460 --> 00:33:09,780
Eric Sin.

463
00:33:10,060 --> 00:33:10,280
Yes.

464
00:33:10,720 --> 00:33:11,040
And Green.

465
00:33:11,260 --> 00:33:11,420
Yes.

466
00:33:11,420 --> 00:33:12,960
Yes, the petition has been approved.

467
00:33:13,840 --> 00:33:14,460
Thank you.

468
00:33:18,060 --> 00:33:26,200
Second case is evening with BK21-11, dealing with an area variance on 10-20 South Fagnall

469
00:33:26,200 --> 00:33:27,400
Road from James Kim.

470
00:33:28,340 --> 00:33:29,440
Grant, would you please make the presentation?

471
00:33:54,030 --> 00:34:00,310
It's Chairman, this is petition number 21-11 and properties at 10-20 South Fagnall Road,

472
00:34:00,810 --> 00:34:02,190
applicant is James Kim.

473
00:34:02,190 --> 00:34:09,450
And the subject zoning is RC regional commercial and the center city overlays district also known as CCO.

474
00:34:10,190 --> 00:34:15,870
CCO is an overlay district that actually mirrors the center city authority boundary,

475
00:34:16,330 --> 00:34:19,750
and that's a tax increment financing or corridor improvement district.

476
00:34:20,350 --> 00:34:26,930
It was approved, the CCO was approved about 40 years ago, and currently regulates just signage.

477
00:34:26,930 --> 00:34:32,430
So the intent behind the CCO district was to provide uniform signage in the district over time.

478
00:34:32,670 --> 00:34:36,490
It's not a police power ordinance which means that there's a certain time frame that

479
00:34:36,490 --> 00:34:41,150
science have to conform to the new ordinance standards. It's simply meant to apply a uniform

480
00:34:42,630 --> 00:34:47,710
type of signage across the district and over times as signage is replaced and there's redevelopment

481
00:34:47,710 --> 00:34:51,710
that takes place. They would all start to conform more and more to add to that uniformity.

482
00:34:52,530 --> 00:35:10,370
But the applicant this evening is requesting a variance from that center city overlay district sign regulations and the specific request is to permit 30 additional square footage of ground signage that would be attached to the existing 40 square feet and located on an 18 foot tall ground full sign.

483
00:35:11,710 --> 00:35:16,490
The center city district does have standards for both ground signage and wall signs.

484
00:35:17,510 --> 00:35:24,870
We do in the city does allow for ground signs in the center city districts, but they must be a monument style.

485
00:35:25,130 --> 00:35:32,150
They cannot exceed 60 square feet in maximum area, and they cannot have a height taller than 12 square feet.

486
00:35:32,750 --> 00:35:41,710
So this is to create lower signage monument style is to remove the pole mounted nature of a lot of signs and

487
00:35:41,710 --> 00:35:46,310
to bring them down closer to eye level with people that are walking as well as driving

488
00:35:46,310 --> 00:35:47,110
through the district.

489
00:35:48,190 --> 00:35:52,630
They're all are the additional wall sign standards that apply and they do allow for

490
00:35:52,630 --> 00:35:56,490
a hundred square feet of wall signage which is actually quite high compared to a lot of

491
00:35:56,490 --> 00:36:01,050
other zoning districts in the city and there are additional allowances that are given through

492
00:36:01,050 --> 00:36:06,570
footnotes that apply to multiple establishments within one building and that is based off the

493
00:36:06,570 --> 00:36:09,610
the millennial foot of the tenant-least building frontage.

494
00:36:09,770 --> 00:36:13,350
So we don't have the exact calculation of what would be allowed wall signage-wise for

495
00:36:13,350 --> 00:36:14,290
this particular property.

496
00:36:14,410 --> 00:36:20,330
We simply just want to point out that there is rather generous sign regulations that are

497
00:36:20,330 --> 00:36:21,750
given to the wall signs.

498
00:36:24,330 --> 00:36:28,630
Looking at the site itself on Stegner Road, this is on the southwest side.

499
00:36:28,870 --> 00:36:33,430
It's just south of the intersection of Eastland Drive and just northwest of the intersection

500
00:36:33,430 --> 00:36:35,770
of Washington Street, highlighted here in yellow.

501
00:36:35,770 --> 00:36:44,530
So this is within the center city district area, which includes properties to the north east and to the southeast.

502
00:36:45,590 --> 00:36:58,110
Immediately to the rear are properties that are multiple zone, multiple family residential, but a lot of them are single family residential homes on Michigan Avenue, and then through Cherry Street, Walnut Street, and the light back off to this side.

503
00:36:58,110 --> 00:37:03,150
There are fences that separate both the residential and the commercial uses that then front

504
00:37:03,150 --> 00:37:04,170
on the Saginaw Road.

505
00:37:04,930 --> 00:37:09,730
And this particular site when you zoom in does have two buildings that are pushed to

506
00:37:09,730 --> 00:37:14,210
the very north and southern extents with the parking area in the center.

507
00:37:14,430 --> 00:37:19,490
So you have two driveway access points for vehicles that come off of Saginaw Road, allowing

508
00:37:19,490 --> 00:37:24,230
for parking in front of both the south building as well as the smaller north building that

509
00:37:24,230 --> 00:37:27,870
that you see with the black top on this aerial photograph.

510
00:37:28,570 --> 00:37:33,910
One thing I do want to point out is that this, the property lines on the city's aerial

511
00:37:33,910 --> 00:37:38,930
photograph are give or take accurate about 10 feet so that it does appear that this sign

512
00:37:38,930 --> 00:37:43,410
is in the right of way, although we have found no evidence that it is, in fact, in the right

513
00:37:43,410 --> 00:37:45,290
of way that it is still on private property.

514
00:37:45,510 --> 00:37:50,350
So I know that that might be a question of why there's an important action on a sign that's

515
00:37:50,350 --> 00:37:54,370
actually in the right-of-way and this is simply just that inaccuracy of the

516
00:37:54,370 --> 00:37:58,950
property lines on the aerial photograph. The zoning district that I mentioned

517
00:37:58,950 --> 00:38:03,810
does have that RSC regional commercial and the center city overlay on top of

518
00:38:03,810 --> 00:38:09,870
that which is that full extent of the pink shade that you see here, properties to

519
00:38:09,870 --> 00:38:15,630
the south, west and to the west are RV multiple-family residential that you see

520
00:38:15,630 --> 00:38:16,310
in the brown shade.

521
00:38:18,500 --> 00:38:21,620
The applicant has provided a couple of sketches illustrating

522
00:38:21,620 --> 00:38:27,880
what they intend to do, and that is simply to add two additional panels to the lower part

523
00:38:27,880 --> 00:38:28,520
of the sign.

524
00:38:28,660 --> 00:38:33,680
This is the existing sign on the top, which does provide that total square footage for

525
00:38:33,680 --> 00:38:36,660
the sign and the height of that 18 feet.

526
00:38:38,970 --> 00:38:45,150
The illustration on the bottom then does show what they would like to do, which is add two

527
00:38:45,150 --> 00:38:51,910
additional 18 inch tall panels that would allow for advertisement on both sides of the poll.

528
00:38:52,490 --> 00:38:59,730
and those would be that width of 10 feet and so each would be 18 inches tall

529
00:38:59,730 --> 00:39:04,470
in addition to the 4 foot tall by 10 foot existing 40 square feet.

530
00:39:07,660 --> 00:39:08,240
The applicant

531
00:39:08,240 --> 00:39:11,960
did submit a site plan with this as well that illustrates where that sign is

532
00:39:11,960 --> 00:39:17,440
located in relation to the property. The property right-of-way line is about one

533
00:39:17,440 --> 00:39:21,120
and a half to two feet off of the backside of the sidewalk and there's about five

534
00:39:21,120 --> 00:39:24,420
feet between the existing sign and where that sidewalk is at so that puts it on

535
00:39:24,420 --> 00:39:29,960
the private property. This shows those existing driveways and how vehicles traverse through

536
00:39:30,460 --> 00:39:35,560
the parking area, avoiding that pole sign right here in the middle. Both of these buildings,

537
00:39:35,560 --> 00:39:39,760
as you saw in that aerial photograph, are pushed quite close to the street. They are legally

538
00:39:39,760 --> 00:39:45,740
non-conforming in that way. Since there would be new requirements to push those buildings back,

539
00:39:45,880 --> 00:39:49,940
if they were to be built brand new right now. But that is something we'll talk a little bit about,

540
00:39:50,080 --> 00:39:54,140
because of course that influences visibility towards the sign as you're driving.

541
00:39:54,420 --> 00:39:55,460
I'm on Saginaw Road.

542
00:39:57,310 --> 00:40:01,890
This is also a 9-news variance, and so I will go through the same five criteria, starting

543
00:40:01,890 --> 00:40:04,190
with the applicant's answers to each of them.

544
00:40:04,470 --> 00:40:09,390
First one being, how will strict compliance with 9-news matters unresolutely prevent the

545
00:40:09,390 --> 00:40:13,150
owner from using the property for permitted purpose, or will render ordinance conformity

546
00:40:13,150 --> 00:40:14,470
unnecessarily burdensome?

547
00:40:14,990 --> 00:40:19,310
The applicant points out that the city's requirement of alignment side would only be visible

548
00:40:19,310 --> 00:40:21,090
from one way direction of the roadway.

549
00:40:21,090 --> 00:40:27,430
The opposite direction of South Saginaw Road would make the sign difficult or non-visible.

550
00:40:28,170 --> 00:40:34,370
The existing sign ordinance would pay the money meant sign for the way from the road causing an obstruction of view.

551
00:40:35,230 --> 00:40:42,910
In addition to the placement away from the road, this situation would take up one or more parking spaces in order to comply with that sign requirement.

552
00:40:43,330 --> 00:40:47,730
This would result in an undue hardship upon the business in this plaza.

553
00:40:48,610 --> 00:41:01,770
To purchase a sign that would not be visible and the loss of the valuable parking space would be counterintuitive and costly to implement the existing sign pool or pool sign where they are asking for a variance would not take up any new real estate.

554
00:41:02,490 --> 00:41:05,710
And they are just asking for a small addition to the sign that is already constructed.

555
00:41:06,170 --> 00:41:15,370
This will result in minimal ground space being flooded with signs that would not be functional and the new sign cabinets would not block or hinder any businesses adjacent.

556
00:41:17,550 --> 00:41:22,650
Staff points out that the applicants are a compliant new sign, a monument size would occupy

557
00:41:22,650 --> 00:41:25,910
that parking space for the property and for the lack of setbacks for both the building

558
00:41:25,910 --> 00:41:26,670
and the parking lot.

559
00:41:27,370 --> 00:41:31,050
There are a number of businesses that use monument signs on South Stegon or Road but most

560
00:41:31,050 --> 00:41:35,990
of all have significant, but most if not all of them have significant setbacks to allow

561
00:41:35,990 --> 00:41:44,110
for parking signage and then the building kind of in sequence back from the sidewalk.

562
00:41:45,030 --> 00:41:48,470
Other structures like the building to the south of the applicant's property utilize wall

563
00:41:48,470 --> 00:41:50,390
signage to advertise through more businesses.

564
00:41:51,130 --> 00:41:55,210
One of those businesses including the little Caesars Plaza also uses a second projected

565
00:41:55,210 --> 00:41:58,970
sign on the property and not on the city property.

566
00:42:00,510 --> 00:42:02,370
That's not on the city property in the right of way.

567
00:42:04,310 --> 00:42:07,430
We also point out that they have no signage in the alley between the applicant's building

568
00:42:07,430 --> 00:42:11,550
and their building and that this means that only traffic coming northbound see the signage

569
00:42:11,550 --> 00:42:13,650
for the building's south of the applicants building.

570
00:42:14,530 --> 00:42:17,750
The ordinance allows for wall signs or roof signs

571
00:42:17,750 --> 00:42:21,550
up to 100 square feet, projecting signs of 12 square feet

572
00:42:21,550 --> 00:42:23,750
and ground signs up to 60 square feet.

573
00:42:25,690 --> 00:42:27,850
Pointing out that we have not received any details

574
00:42:27,850 --> 00:42:30,810
on the exact square footage of the existing wall signs

575
00:42:30,810 --> 00:42:34,050
or what would be permitted up to that 100 plus allowance.

576
00:42:37,190 --> 00:42:38,770
How will the variance do substantial justice

577
00:42:38,770 --> 00:42:40,750
to the applicant as well as the other property owners?

578
00:42:41,670 --> 00:42:58,610
The businesses in this possible would be positively benefit from the extra signage if you potentially draw more patronage into the existing stores in the area with the economic development, the pandemic has caused issues in the area and improvement in advertising would be beneficial.

579
00:42:59,550 --> 00:43:02,490
It would draw as much patron traffic to the area,

580
00:43:02,830 --> 00:43:04,570
would not just help their circumstances

581
00:43:04,570 --> 00:43:06,990
also to the other businesses in the surrounding area.

582
00:43:07,470 --> 00:43:09,950
It would improve center city as well as part of the city of Midland

583
00:43:09,950 --> 00:43:12,250
is always in the best interest of every business.

584
00:43:13,450 --> 00:43:16,730
They have two tenants who do not have an advertising on the single,

585
00:43:17,250 --> 00:43:19,350
the single cabinet poll sign currently

586
00:43:19,350 --> 00:43:22,390
so they'd be wanting to advertise those two businesses

587
00:43:22,390 --> 00:43:24,870
and they have requested space to advertise.

588
00:43:24,870 --> 00:43:25,070
That is,

589
00:43:27,260 --> 00:43:48,920
staff points out that the applicant or the approval would provide the applicant with additional signage similar to what is allowed in the RC district without the extra regulations of the center city overlay, that being said, there seems to be a few alternatives regarding signage and that staff cannot say with certainty which options may be the most beneficial to the business since we don't have all of that information.

590
00:43:48,920 --> 00:43:53,660
The applicant might even be able to modify the existing sign staying within the existing

591
00:43:53,660 --> 00:43:58,660
square footage by reducing the laundry signage and adding additional business names or a

592
00:43:58,660 --> 00:44:02,260
name for the plaza while utilizing wall signage for specific businesses.

593
00:44:02,980 --> 00:44:08,020
Staple is that the applicant's desire to increase the sign's size is in addition to the options

594
00:44:08,020 --> 00:44:10,400
available allowed by the ordinance currently.

595
00:44:12,950 --> 00:44:17,050
The variance requested is the minimum variance needed to provide substantial relief to the applicant.

596
00:44:18,810 --> 00:44:24,030
The applicant points out that many of the businesses in the area of center city have

597
00:44:24,030 --> 00:44:28,710
signage that they are requesting and that their location is very unique, where any ordinance

598
00:44:28,710 --> 00:44:33,190
that would move, assign a way and provide ground level from the roadway would most likely

599
00:44:33,190 --> 00:44:34,850
not improve traffic into the business.

600
00:44:35,630 --> 00:44:40,350
They have observed countless other businesses with multiple sign cabinets on single posts

601
00:44:40,350 --> 00:44:41,050
throughout the city.

602
00:44:41,050 --> 00:44:47,670
If the variance were to be allowed and permitted, the business is in the plaza would not

603
00:44:47,670 --> 00:44:53,790
only keep the number of parking spaces at its present count, but the new signs would

604
00:44:53,790 --> 00:44:57,210
be beneficial, beneficially observed by the traffic.

605
00:44:58,330 --> 00:44:59,190
This is the main.

606
00:45:00,000 --> 00:45:09,120
This is the main reason signs are constructed at businesses throughout the city and the variants that they are seeking would not harm or restrict any adjacent businesses whatsoever.

607
00:45:12,000 --> 00:45:21,880
Stat points out that the applicant currently has projected in wall signage, similar to surrounded properties from the road, the wall signs appear easier to read than the projected signage.

608
00:45:22,180 --> 00:45:29,820
The applicant has not indicated if they intend to add new tenants in the building or simply would like the larger signs to advertise the primary occupant.

609
00:45:29,820 --> 00:45:33,780
They suspect that they plan to add tenants and, therefore, would like more signage.

610
00:45:34,360 --> 00:45:39,180
The applicant could modify their wall signage, which would allow southbound travelers to identify the businesses.

611
00:45:39,840 --> 00:45:42,380
But this is not resolved issues for travelers heading northbound.

612
00:45:46,250 --> 00:45:51,690
What are the unique circumstances precluded to the business and not applicable in the area or

613
00:45:51,690 --> 00:45:54,850
other properties in the same zoning district, which would require this variance?

614
00:45:55,630 --> 00:45:58,510
The applicant indicates that it's the plaza that they are located.

615
00:45:59,010 --> 00:46:02,430
There are two buildings relatively close to the roadway, where there is minimal space

616
00:46:02,430 --> 00:46:07,470
to construct a sign according to the City of Midland regulations.

617
00:46:08,230 --> 00:46:11,830
They would have to construct a comply sign,

618
00:46:12,370 --> 00:46:16,770
a quit, just from the roadway, thus negating any benefit of a cost of project.

619
00:46:17,150 --> 00:46:22,610
Many of the businesses adjacent to our location have very normal space away from the road

620
00:46:22,610 --> 00:46:25,670
to comply with the new ordinance standards, but that is not a luxury that they have.

621
00:46:29,070 --> 00:46:31,910
Staff points out that the applicant building has the zero setbacks

622
00:46:31,910 --> 00:46:33,810
which limits visibility for monument sign.

623
00:46:34,490 --> 00:46:36,510
There are a number of businesses in the center of city

624
00:46:36,510 --> 00:46:38,250
overlay district that share this characteristics.

625
00:46:39,030 --> 00:46:40,450
Not all buildings with zero setbacks

626
00:46:40,450 --> 00:46:42,250
that equivalously against another building.

627
00:46:42,610 --> 00:46:43,970
Therefore, limiting sign visibility

628
00:46:43,970 --> 00:46:46,950
should the signage be on the wall of the building itself.

629
00:46:47,610 --> 00:46:48,450
In the case of the applicants,

630
00:46:48,550 --> 00:46:51,690
the neighbor to the south, the owner chose to use wall signage

631
00:46:51,690 --> 00:46:53,550
in the second sign to the little sea there's plazas.

632
00:46:53,730 --> 00:46:57,710
So this is effectively delineating the inability

633
00:46:57,710 --> 00:46:59,270
for them to have a southern exposure

634
00:46:59,270 --> 00:47:00,910
of their wall signs to take advantage

635
00:47:00,910 --> 00:47:02,130
of that northbound traffic.

636
00:47:04,980 --> 00:47:09,520
And then lastly, the resulting need has been created by street compliance with the zoning

637
00:47:09,520 --> 00:47:11,740
ordinance, not by the applicant or the applicants predecessor.

638
00:47:12,600 --> 00:47:17,160
The applicant indicates that they have been located and in business here since 1986.

639
00:47:17,900 --> 00:47:21,800
The signs that are now in place were constructed during the preceding years and were at the

640
00:47:21,800 --> 00:47:22,540
timing compliance.

641
00:47:23,100 --> 00:47:27,400
The new ordinance, we believe, were modified to address new building codes and setbacks that

642
00:47:27,400 --> 00:47:30,540
the planning commission created to negate future problems.

643
00:47:30,540 --> 00:47:34,800
They wish the new sign ordinances would allow, would also include the compliance that existed

644
00:47:34,800 --> 00:47:35,680
for many years ago.

645
00:47:36,140 --> 00:47:41,400
It is very difficult, if not impossible, to undo past construction methods that met strict

646
00:47:41,400 --> 00:47:43,080
ordinances during that period.

647
00:47:44,920 --> 00:47:48,860
Stack points out that similar to any district that experience is changing in the zoning, any

648
00:47:48,860 --> 00:47:51,680
modifications to the property are subject to the current zoning ordinance.

649
00:47:52,080 --> 00:47:55,320
It appears that the resulting need is due to the applicant's desire to increase the ground

650
00:47:55,320 --> 00:47:58,680
sign square footage rather than seeking strict compliance with the ordnance standard.

651
00:48:01,540 --> 00:48:05,700
So with that, Sherman, this is a three-fist vote that's required to approve this variant,

652
00:48:06,280 --> 00:48:12,040
and to date we have had one communication that's been received indicating no objection

653
00:48:12,040 --> 00:48:13,040
to the petition.

654
00:48:14,120 --> 00:48:15,700
And with that, I will entertain the question.

655
00:48:15,840 --> 00:48:17,160
Questions for staff regarding that?

656
00:48:20,480 --> 00:48:22,040
So, yeah.

657
00:48:22,320 --> 00:48:22,380
Good.

658
00:48:22,480 --> 00:48:27,420
So, can you put up the picture again of the building and where the sign is?

659
00:48:28,500 --> 00:48:31,620
So, as I understand, yeah, that's good, yeah.

660
00:48:31,940 --> 00:48:34,760
So, these buildings are both have no setbacks, right?

661
00:48:35,020 --> 00:48:41,760
So, they're obviously, that's making it difficult for the monumental sign, the monument sign, right?

662
00:48:42,380 --> 00:48:47,640
And because in between, it's very difficult for traffic to necessarily see,

663
00:48:49,020 --> 00:48:51,040
coming northbound, to see the sign.

664
00:48:51,040 --> 00:48:53,560
Yep, that's the argument that the applicant's indicating.

665
00:48:54,540 --> 00:48:59,520
And actually, if I go back just a couple more, this might be a better image that's shown.

666
00:48:59,740 --> 00:49:04,360
So you've got the sign that's located here, and so the applicant's pointing out that

667
00:49:04,960 --> 00:49:11,820
vehicles traveling down southbound or southeastbound on Saginaw Road, if this was a monument

668
00:49:11,820 --> 00:49:18,220
sign that was set back from the sidewalk, the visibility would be less than what the 18 foot

669
00:49:18,220 --> 00:49:23,100
high sign is currently since it's lower to the ground and would be set back further from

670
00:49:23,760 --> 00:49:24,600
the street.

671
00:49:30,560 --> 00:49:36,620
Of course, Northbound coming from Saginaw Road towards the Northwest, a similar type of

672
00:49:38,280 --> 00:49:42,820
question, although one thing to point out would be simply the distance between those travel lanes

673
00:49:42,820 --> 00:49:47,970
and the sign itself that would open up that vision triangle just a little bit more than the south

674
00:49:47,970 --> 00:49:53,770
And can you also comment on the little caesars just south of the building?

675
00:49:54,090 --> 00:49:54,130
Yeah.

676
00:49:54,370 --> 00:49:55,350
They have a poll sign.

677
00:49:56,030 --> 00:49:56,470
Yes.

678
00:49:56,830 --> 00:49:56,950
Right.

679
00:49:58,030 --> 00:50:01,110
But then they do, they also have signage on the building too.

680
00:50:01,330 --> 00:50:07,730
They do have a well sign, and then they also have a projecting sign that's perpendicular to the building that is visible for cars.

681
00:50:16,960 --> 00:50:25,580
So is there any sort of grant on the, if someone's to go back and go to the roof of one of those buildings with a sign that would be perpendicular

682
00:50:25,580 --> 00:50:31,600
particular to the roadway? Is there a 100 square foot ordinance of a wall or roof signage?

683
00:50:32,000 --> 00:50:38,960
Is there any sort of height limitation of such a sign?

684
00:50:39,580 --> 00:50:41,460
And you're saying directly on top of the roof?

685
00:50:41,640 --> 00:50:44,940
Correct. If I either, you know, bolted it or did some sort of a pull extension on the roof

686
00:50:44,940 --> 00:50:51,020
that would allow for visibility, similar to the pull sign on front, the amount on the building.

687
00:51:22,130 --> 00:51:32,710
So with any roof sign in the city limits, we actually say that the roof sign may not be higher than the roof line of the building, so they would not be able to simply place the sign on top of the building that would exceed that line.

688
00:51:32,850 --> 00:51:34,130
So they cannot put a roof top.

689
00:51:34,510 --> 00:51:36,050
A roof top would not be permitted.

690
00:51:36,230 --> 00:51:37,570
Okay. Thank you.

691
00:51:38,250 --> 00:51:39,310
Any other questions for Stan?

692
00:51:39,990 --> 00:51:40,650
Yes, I have one.

693
00:51:40,650 --> 00:51:45,690
So there's a question about leaving or losing a parking space.

694
00:51:46,310 --> 00:51:50,090
Does the property have sufficient parking in terms of the ordinance currently?

695
00:51:51,270 --> 00:51:53,450
Yes, they do with their current requirements.

696
00:51:53,930 --> 00:51:56,710
We have not done a parking calculation to know if they were to lose one.

697
00:51:56,770 --> 00:51:58,410
If that would put them out of compliance, however.

698
00:51:58,910 --> 00:52:00,710
But we do know they are compliant currently.

699
00:52:01,010 --> 00:52:04,290
Okay, but they would definitely lose one parking space if they put a monument sign in.

700
00:52:04,550 --> 00:52:04,950
That's correct.

701
00:52:05,390 --> 00:52:05,490
Okay.

702
00:52:05,490 --> 00:52:05,550
Yeah.

703
00:52:08,140 --> 00:52:08,480
Sorry.

704
00:52:08,640 --> 00:52:09,280
I have a question.

705
00:52:10,500 --> 00:52:21,920
According to his calculation, the existing sign is 3 square feet and the regulations on

706
00:52:21,920 --> 00:52:25,000
this center city are 60 square feet.

707
00:52:25,440 --> 00:52:31,140
What would prevent him from adding 20 more feet to that sign with a new sign?

708
00:52:31,140 --> 00:52:36,360
So the fact that the center city required that all new ground signs be

709
00:52:36,360 --> 00:52:41,020
monument in nature would not allow for a poll sign to be modified. So you

710
00:52:41,020 --> 00:52:46,260
couldn't make your poll sign or non-conforming. If you're gonna change the

711
00:52:46,260 --> 00:52:50,000
overall square footage you have to conform to the standard. Well how about if he

712
00:52:50,000 --> 00:52:55,680
if he created a monument around the base of the existing pool?

713
00:53:03,570 --> 00:53:08,130
So let me think

714
00:53:13,410 --> 00:53:31,330
So he would need to comply so the total of 60 square feet of ground signage would be a hard stop so he would be able to do that but he would not be able to exceed 20 square feet with that since you'd have the 40 of top and you'd be able to do 20 below and it couldn't be more than 60 square feet.

715
00:53:32,350 --> 00:53:39,810
If that's another understanding, what do you mean, 40 and 20, I don't know what that is?

716
00:53:39,870 --> 00:53:44,390
So in total in this intercity overlay district, you can't have more than 60 square feet of

717
00:53:44,390 --> 00:53:44,730
signage.

718
00:53:44,910 --> 00:53:46,810
So we have to work within that maximum.

719
00:53:46,810 --> 00:53:47,070
Okay.

720
00:53:47,350 --> 00:53:50,470
So the fact that he has 40 already, he'd only be allowed 20 additional.

721
00:53:50,790 --> 00:53:56,830
Okay, but I'm talking so he creates a new sign, which is 60 puts a monument around the

722
00:53:56,830 --> 00:54:03,570
bottom, makes a new sign on the top, which is 60 square feet as opposed to his existing 40.

723
00:54:04,210 --> 00:54:08,070
He would have to remove the 40 square feet if he was going to do that all 60.

724
00:54:08,190 --> 00:54:09,310
Yeah, replace it, yeah.

725
00:54:09,430 --> 00:54:10,910
Yeah, he would have to replace it, exactly.

726
00:54:11,990 --> 00:54:13,990
Would that monument sign then be in the right of way?

727
00:54:14,750 --> 00:54:17,010
We would require that it be set back in that direction.

728
00:54:17,010 --> 00:54:20,270
So it would be visibly, it have to be moved back from its current location.

729
00:54:20,610 --> 00:54:26,770
I'm assuming where the pole is now is allowing the elevated sign to protrude over top of

730
00:54:26,770 --> 00:54:29,430
the right of way even though it's not physically in it at ground level.

731
00:54:29,630 --> 00:54:30,050
That's correct.

732
00:54:30,390 --> 00:54:30,610
Okay.

733
00:54:30,730 --> 00:54:31,010
I thought so.

734
00:54:31,170 --> 00:54:31,310
Yep.

735
00:54:31,470 --> 00:54:37,950
So if you look at, there's, it's five feet away from the, the sidewalk and the, the

736
00:54:37,950 --> 00:54:39,450
10 and it's 10 feet wide.

737
00:54:39,690 --> 00:54:40,090
So yes.

738
00:54:40,230 --> 00:54:43,570
So that five feet is to accommodate that, that overhang like you indicated.

739
00:54:44,070 --> 00:54:44,190
Yeah.

740
00:54:45,050 --> 00:54:48,530
So you would not be able to put an exact sign at the ground level period.

741
00:54:49,150 --> 00:54:49,510
Correct.

742
00:54:50,130 --> 00:54:50,290
Okay.

743
00:54:50,470 --> 00:54:50,590
Yep.

744
00:54:50,690 --> 00:54:51,590
You would have to set it back.

745
00:54:51,690 --> 00:54:54,830
I believe you have to set it back at least two feet from the right of way.

746
00:54:54,830 --> 00:54:57,550
and then you could build in that location.

747
00:54:58,830 --> 00:55:02,410
But you would also have a maximum of 12 square feet.

748
00:55:02,710 --> 00:55:05,890
So, or 12 feet. So, you would be able to do

749
00:55:07,770 --> 00:55:09,830
60 divided by 12. I'm trying to think of five.

750
00:55:09,970 --> 00:55:10,810
There we go again.

751
00:55:12,450 --> 00:55:15,450
You would be able to do 5 feet wide, 12 feet tall,

752
00:55:16,070 --> 00:55:19,650
or anything within that dimension of not exceeding 12 feet in height.

753
00:55:20,290 --> 00:55:20,510
Okay.

754
00:55:21,410 --> 00:55:23,190
So, you could put a 12 foot height sign.

755
00:55:23,850 --> 00:55:28,870
a grant, a monument sign, a monument sign, it's 12 feet high, correct. That would be very odd.

756
00:55:29,950 --> 00:55:35,530
It's what the exact ordinance meeting that ordinance standard of 12 feet high and five feet wide

757
00:55:35,530 --> 00:55:42,430
is CDS across the street. Okay, yeah, all right. I have a question. Grant, we're going in. This is what's

758
00:55:42,430 --> 00:55:47,450
been the question about the applicant. He shows a clearance from street, I mean, from the ground level

759
00:55:47,450 --> 00:55:52,570
to the bottom of the sign of 11 feet. Is there any regulation of the city? I mean, if that option would

760
00:55:52,570 --> 00:55:54,930
Is there a certain minimum height that much be?

761
00:55:55,830 --> 00:56:00,990
We don't have a minimum standard for that since there's not going to be like vehicles

762
00:56:00,990 --> 00:56:06,650
traversing underneath, so there wouldn't be anything that would permit that.

763
00:56:08,110 --> 00:56:09,770
Any other questions from Stanton?

764
00:56:10,190 --> 00:56:14,970
Is there going to be a viewing issue if it has a monument sign because it's a unique parking lot?

765
00:56:15,650 --> 00:56:16,610
No setbacks.

766
00:56:17,850 --> 00:56:22,690
When cars are pulling in or pulling out, is that going to be a traffic issue?

767
00:56:23,970 --> 00:56:24,730
I had the question too.

768
00:56:25,170 --> 00:56:26,050
So, yes.

769
00:56:26,290 --> 00:56:29,350
So, if cars are pulling in and pulling out and they're in the way of that sign, they

770
00:56:29,350 --> 00:56:31,670
would be blocking a large portion of that monument sign.

771
00:56:31,910 --> 00:56:39,490
Since cars are usually about 5 to 8 feet, sometimes taller, so you would have either partial or

772
00:56:39,490 --> 00:56:42,890
full blockage of that monument sign as cars are moving back and forth.

773
00:56:42,890 --> 00:56:49,990
This being 14 feet before currently does get you outside of the vast majority of the height of vehicles.

774
00:56:50,350 --> 00:56:57,270
But I mean my question is actually slightly different is, okay, will the driver not be able to see the traffic coming?

775
00:56:58,770 --> 00:57:01,870
The driver of the vehicle inside the parking lot is a good thing to say about that.

776
00:57:01,870 --> 00:57:02,790
I see what you're saying.

777
00:57:02,950 --> 00:57:06,330
Yes, so that I'm glad you brought that up because I should have applied that standard.

778
00:57:06,450 --> 00:57:09,770
So we do have the clear vision triangle that would apply to both of those driveways,

779
00:57:09,770 --> 00:57:13,110
which would push that monument sign much further back away from the road.

780
00:57:13,370 --> 00:57:14,210
And that was my question.

781
00:57:14,290 --> 00:57:15,750
Yes, yes, at the same point.

782
00:57:16,170 --> 00:57:19,330
Yeah, so I was mistaken, you would not be able to go two feet away from that sidewalk.

783
00:57:19,330 --> 00:57:27,110
You'd probably be at least ten feet back in order to allow for cars to not be impeded by the clear vision.

784
00:57:27,290 --> 00:57:27,750
Okay, thank you.

785
00:57:28,150 --> 00:57:30,510
I have another later question, Grant.

786
00:57:31,230 --> 00:57:39,270
The building that's to the southeast with the pizza restaurant is they have no signage.

787
00:57:39,270 --> 00:57:47,370
on the street do they because there's a car there's a cartridge printing cartridge place there they don't have any signage on it on the street

788
00:57:55,090 --> 00:58:01,750
Maybe a wall sign in the front facing basically facing the southeast. I don't think there's any street sign up there

789
00:58:02,290 --> 00:58:09,450
Next to these a full-mounted sign anything that's on that particular site double check and see I know for sure

790
00:58:09,450 --> 00:58:11,810
They have wall signage in the back projecting sign on the building

791
00:58:12,890 --> 00:58:17,570
But even at looking at the aerial photograph, I don't see a shadow that's being casted.

792
00:58:17,710 --> 00:58:18,970
Also, I don't believe they've got.

793
00:58:18,970 --> 00:58:19,470
I don't think there is.

794
00:58:19,730 --> 00:58:21,790
From signage, unless it's close to the building.

795
00:58:21,810 --> 00:58:23,530
Because they have the same property line issue.

796
00:58:24,070 --> 00:58:27,410
It appears to have the same property line issue with the building and budget of the property line.

797
00:58:27,810 --> 00:58:27,870
Yep.

798
00:58:32,320 --> 00:58:39,000
When just a point of clarification, is it possible for him to,

799
00:58:44,820 --> 00:58:45,260
I don't know,

800
00:58:45,260 --> 00:58:50,540
Let's let's say it's 40 square feet and that seems like it is of the current type. Yes. Yeah

801
00:58:51,080 --> 00:59:02,180
Can he just simply put a new sign in that location at 60 square feet instead of giving 20 square feet more to he could not extend that cabinet in any way

802
00:59:02,180 --> 00:59:06,520
So if he's simply just wanting to replace like for like in that 10 by 4 by 10

803
00:59:06,520 --> 00:59:09,340
Yeah, he could do that, but he wouldn't be able to enlarge that cabinet

804
00:59:09,340 --> 00:59:15,200
So he's not really going to replace it. He just can't accept it. Correct. Okay. Okay, so he can't make it 60 feet

805
00:59:15,260 --> 00:59:18,080
Yeah, well, how about just the

806
00:59:18,720 --> 00:59:20,440
Out of bearings for it? Okay, it got you

807
00:59:21,380 --> 00:59:28,240
I can't say that there is a ground sign at little scissors. It does it's right at that intersection if I can put my cursor up

808
00:59:28,240 --> 00:59:32,880
It's right here where that building. It's right at the corner of this building and doesn't see

809
00:59:33,700 --> 00:59:38,240
Looks to be either 18 feet or maybe a little bit taller. Yeah

810
00:59:38,820 --> 00:59:42,040
Compared to the state of the service subject time we're talking. Okay

811
00:59:42,040 --> 00:59:47,310
Any other questions with staff regarding this?

812
00:59:54,960 --> 00:59:56,240
We didn't see them.

813
00:59:56,540 --> 00:59:57,840
We're in the presentation.

814
00:59:58,180 --> 00:59:59,980
Anyone else in the audience regarding this?

815
01:00:00,140 --> 01:00:28,500
If we wish to make comment and fake of support of the applicant, hearing none seeing them, we're now the opportunity anyone in opposition. To the ground sign, request. My name is Simon, request. Do an opposition? We'll officially oppose the public portion of the meeting now and let's begin with the findings of fact. We wish us to start on this one.

816
01:00:30,280 --> 01:00:35,980
Well, it's located at 10, 20 South Saginaw.

817
01:00:37,000 --> 01:00:41,320
The speed limit on South Saginaw is 35 miles an hour.

818
01:00:44,960 --> 01:00:47,440
There are no comments on the variance.

819
01:00:49,960 --> 01:00:59,440
It is governed by the regional city center overlay district rules as

820
01:01:02,800 --> 01:01:03,200
a starting.

821
01:01:04,280 --> 01:01:04,760
Yes.

822
01:01:05,340 --> 01:01:06,840
I wanted a sheet sheet we have.

823
01:01:06,840 --> 01:01:07,280
Oh I'm sorry.

824
01:01:09,080 --> 01:01:11,020
You're giving me time to put my money on.

825
01:01:11,020 --> 01:01:11,600
Yeah, good.

826
01:01:11,880 --> 01:01:13,800
Just trying to take the pressure off your grand.

827
01:01:14,280 --> 01:01:15,200
I appreciate that.

828
01:01:15,360 --> 01:01:16,000
Oh, it's right.

829
01:01:16,080 --> 01:01:19,920
I'm zoning is the regional commercial and the center city overlay as well as RB multiple

830
01:01:19,920 --> 01:01:24,300
family residential, 35 miles an hour on the on South Fingered Road as indicated.

831
01:01:25,180 --> 01:01:30,000
No comments in support, not in opposition, but we did have that one indicating no objection.

832
01:01:31,500 --> 01:01:38,200
The area of the property, well the current use of the property is commercial business.

833
01:01:38,840 --> 01:01:43,140
The area of the property is 190 feet wide by 120 feet.

834
01:01:46,830 --> 01:01:52,630
The property currently has an 18-foot tall ground pole sign that is 40 square feet.

835
01:01:53,330 --> 01:01:55,090
It is 10 feet wide.

836
01:01:56,980 --> 01:02:02,620
They are requesting a 30 square foot additional signage to that pole sign.

837
01:02:04,180 --> 01:02:10,820
They give them a total length of 70 square feet, which is over the 60 square feet maximum.

838
01:02:10,820 --> 01:02:22,240
So the property is right on the, run the property line with no setbacks.

839
01:02:23,440 --> 01:02:27,120
There's two buildings, one to the north and south of this parking lot and the sign.

840
01:02:28,540 --> 01:02:36,320
To put a monument, that's my fighting spank, it's going too far.

841
01:02:38,200 --> 01:02:53,840
So any new sign would be required to be a monument type sign not exceeding 60 square feet in total and would be subject to the clear triangle rule of city ordinance.

842
01:02:58,030 --> 01:03:04,470
Any new monument sign would have a maximum height of 12 feet. The current sign has a height of 18 feet, I believe.

843
01:03:21,130 --> 01:03:26,450
And although the existing property is classified regional commercial, the

844
01:03:26,450 --> 01:03:30,950
center of city overlay, it is bounded on the, what would be the north, should

845
01:03:30,950 --> 01:03:37,530
be on the northwest side, or they should be the southwest side by residential RB,

846
01:03:37,930 --> 01:03:39,670
classified property,

847
01:03:42,430 --> 01:03:44,230
and what's the speed limit on the second one, 35 today?

848
01:03:44,410 --> 01:03:44,550
35.

849
01:03:44,810 --> 01:03:45,890
I thought it was okay, 35.

850
01:03:47,750 --> 01:03:53,910
There was a fence between that residential property and the commercial property that's running on South Secondary Road.

851
01:03:53,950 --> 01:03:54,050
Yes.

852
01:04:06,920 --> 01:04:10,420
And on both properties, storefronts I give out of it just one.

853
01:04:13,050 --> 01:04:14,050
As long as a large amount.

854
01:04:15,690 --> 01:04:16,050
There's a coin.

855
01:04:16,230 --> 01:04:19,410
Yeah, they're both coin or something like that.

856
01:04:19,410 --> 01:04:20,150
Yeah, the coin and that.

857
01:04:20,350 --> 01:04:25,990
There is property, the parts which do have existing businesses.

858
01:04:25,990 --> 01:04:29,050
Yeah, just existing question

859
01:04:32,220 --> 01:04:37,840
in the other thing we wish to add I think the applicant demonstrated

860
01:04:37,840 --> 01:04:42,840
that there were I can't find a real quick that there were two tenants that weren't able

861
01:04:42,840 --> 01:04:48,960
to have space on the manual which is what they're trying to accommodate here is to existing

862
01:04:48,960 --> 01:04:51,340
tenants to be able to advertise grant

863
01:04:55,080 --> 01:04:57,580
is just just just a point of information on this

864
01:04:57,580 --> 01:05:14,220
Well, is it possible for this person to just replace the existing sign with another sign that's exactly the same size and, you know, change the lettering and everything?

865
01:05:14,620 --> 01:05:21,860
They could take out the panels of the sign, replace those, but they would have to keep the pole in place, they'd have to keep the cabinet in place.

866
01:05:21,860 --> 01:05:28,560
but they do have the option to simply just change out that 40 square feet with new signage that would advertise every business.

867
01:05:29,180 --> 01:05:34,680
So if the sign pole would have become decrepit and dangerous, they would have to replace it with the monument sign.

868
01:05:34,860 --> 01:05:35,240
That's correct.

869
01:05:38,370 --> 01:05:41,290
Would that be true even if we gave them an ordinance for the pole sign now?

870
01:05:43,390 --> 01:05:49,430
So the variance that would be, if this was approved, that would apply simply to the addition of those two cabinets.

871
01:05:49,430 --> 01:05:55,190
So, say that it were to go out and disrepair and need to be fully replaced, they would need

872
01:05:55,190 --> 01:05:56,710
to conform to the ordinance at that time.

873
01:05:57,410 --> 01:05:58,570
Or obtain a second variance.

874
01:05:58,630 --> 01:05:59,630
Or obtain a second variance.

875
01:06:02,300 --> 01:06:06,820
Anything we should add to the findings of the fact that we are understanding what the findings

876
01:06:06,820 --> 01:06:10,140
of the fact have been developed,

877
01:06:14,330 --> 01:06:17,330
anyone wants to have read them back or we fully understand?

878
01:06:18,170 --> 01:06:18,970
I'm good with it.

879
01:06:19,010 --> 01:06:19,270
Very good.

880
01:06:19,750 --> 01:06:19,910
Okay.

881
01:06:20,450 --> 01:06:22,450
Based on that, I will solicit a motion.

882
01:06:22,450 --> 01:06:34,470
I'm motion that we accept report number 21-11 to approve the variance for 10-20 South

883
01:06:34,470 --> 01:06:34,890
Saginawe.

884
01:06:35,310 --> 01:06:36,650
I have support for that.

885
01:06:37,170 --> 01:06:37,530
Support?

886
01:06:39,370 --> 01:06:41,530
We'll be doing the work you'll begin the first afternoon.

887
01:06:43,210 --> 01:06:43,430
All right.

888
01:06:44,530 --> 01:06:52,370
So the first comment here is how will strict compliance make this unreasonable for the

889
01:06:52,370 --> 01:06:54,850
owner. This is a difficult one.

890
01:06:57,550 --> 01:07:01,070
The property is very unique in comparison to the

891
01:07:01,070 --> 01:07:06,530
most majority of the other buildings up and down this part of the city. So I

892
01:07:06,530 --> 01:07:11,570
will suggest based on the lack of the setbacks of the current buildings, having

893
01:07:11,570 --> 01:07:15,230
to take that sign out and put it in a monument sign is an unreasonable request

894
01:07:15,230 --> 01:07:19,910
because of also the parking and the triangle viewing. So I will say, I think it

895
01:07:19,910 --> 01:07:21,710
is a necessary burdensome.

896
01:07:22,850 --> 01:07:27,130
How would the variance use substantial justice to the applicant, as well as all the property

897
01:07:27,130 --> 01:07:27,410
owners?

898
01:07:28,030 --> 01:07:31,710
All the property owners like little seizures have very similar signs, that signs have been

899
01:07:31,710 --> 01:07:32,470
there for a long time.

900
01:07:33,010 --> 01:07:37,470
They at least gives them a chance to advertise some other building or other runchers at that

901
01:07:37,470 --> 01:07:39,630
site, so it does give them justice there.

902
01:07:41,790 --> 01:07:45,030
Is the variance request the minimum variance need to provide substantial relief?

903
01:07:46,330 --> 01:07:51,850
He is only asking for two 18-inch signs that are going to stay the same width of the 10-foot width.

904
01:07:52,630 --> 01:07:59,210
So, to me, the 18-inch height is not a significant, to me, it's a minimal request.

905
01:08:02,510 --> 01:08:07,630
So, with unique circumstances, particular is property that are not generally applicable in the area.

906
01:08:08,050 --> 01:08:10,410
Again, this is a very unique with the zero setbacks.

907
01:08:11,570 --> 01:08:23,210
Everything else is CVS across the street, the Walgreens or the Cady Corner, the properties right on the setback, and then if it does have to go back in and take out some more property, it's a more parking spot.

908
01:08:23,210 --> 01:08:30,550
It is a very difficult issue, so it's really the building how it's constructed, which is making this difficult.

909
01:08:32,190 --> 01:08:35,250
As a problem, the result of the need for the variance has been created by strict compliance.

910
01:08:35,510 --> 01:08:41,090
Yes, I mean, he is going to be a larger assigned than was required and he has a poll signed burst of the monument.

911
01:08:41,730 --> 01:08:46,430
So to come into conformance, he is out of compliance.

912
01:08:48,560 --> 01:08:50,320
Thank you very much, additional comments.

913
01:08:51,060 --> 01:08:59,180
Yeah, I would agree on the first item that to comply with the clear view triangle grant had mentioned

914
01:08:59,180 --> 01:09:14,640
It would be approximately 10 feet back from the building's setback, which if I look at where the existing pole is on the submission exhibit B, an additional five feet beyond that before it could even start.

915
01:09:15,060 --> 01:09:26,260
I think would honestly make the sign pretty much not visible from either direction until you're pretty much on top of the building, which would negate any efficacy of that signed visibility.

916
01:09:27,080 --> 01:09:39,080
There are, I think I'm pretty familiar with a lot of the different sizes in how far you should be able to see a sign at X numbers of miles an hour, what size they are and how much, you know, run time you need.

917
01:09:39,340 --> 01:09:45,320
I don't see how you could possibly comply with a reasonable visibility of 35 miles an hour if it was set back that far.

918
01:09:50,100 --> 01:09:54,920
The point I think though is that his current sign, although it's not in compliance with

919
01:09:54,920 --> 01:09:57,520
the ordinances, he's not being required to take the sign down.

920
01:09:57,660 --> 01:10:00,120
He could keep the sign up, he could reface that sign.

921
01:10:00,460 --> 01:10:02,920
He could repaint the sign to advertise the two businesses.

922
01:10:03,620 --> 01:10:08,120
He could explore, and he apparently hasn't, the idea of putting up wall signs or group signs

923
01:10:08,120 --> 01:10:12,720
or production signs up to 100 square feet, which would alleviate some of the problems he's

924
01:10:12,720 --> 01:10:13,380
having currently.

925
01:10:13,380 --> 01:10:16,780
I think the biggest thing is for him, this is cheaper to do in this this way.

926
01:10:16,900 --> 01:10:20,660
He was just this and sign by a couple of panels, put it on top of it.

927
01:10:20,960 --> 01:10:25,580
He gets everything he wants, but he's the purpose of the ordinance is to try to get eventually

928
01:10:25,580 --> 01:10:32,240
the entire area into compliance, where instead allowing somebody to further go past what's

929
01:10:32,240 --> 01:10:35,780
already in compliance, whatever the ordinance says and make it even worse by adding additional

930
01:10:35,780 --> 01:10:36,920
signage to it.

931
01:10:38,760 --> 01:10:39,340
Thank you.

932
01:10:39,900 --> 01:10:40,340
Roger.

933
01:10:40,340 --> 01:10:41,080
It's really interesting.

934
01:10:41,080 --> 01:10:45,100
I think Peter pointed out the uniqueness of the situation and I agree with it.

935
01:10:45,400 --> 01:10:54,800
I don't find anything different and Julie points out that what the fix is.

936
01:10:55,440 --> 01:11:00,140
And so I agree with what's been said and I'm ready to vote.

937
01:11:01,000 --> 01:11:02,760
Just a couple of comments.

938
01:11:03,220 --> 01:11:08,340
The fact that I guess the uniqueness, there are obviously, there are some unique ones

939
01:11:08,340 --> 01:11:12,480
the property. But again, as we've seen this this evening, there are other properties

940
01:11:12,480 --> 01:11:18,500
along the area that have the same issues of of position and relationship to the property

941
01:11:18,500 --> 01:11:23,880
line. So that's the one that gives me the biggest trouble accepting the fact. And again,

942
01:11:24,120 --> 01:11:31,760
keep in mind that when we vote on the criteria, it's all five. That if one is would be a negative,

943
01:11:32,100 --> 01:11:37,780
that's that must be considered. And so when you make your deliberation, please remember

944
01:11:37,780 --> 01:11:39,420
that they all have to be in the firm and if.

945
01:11:40,560 --> 01:11:44,200
I would say that I think that this property is somewhat unique in that it does have a

946
01:11:44,200 --> 01:11:48,360
building on each side of the property with a center parking area, whereas the parking

947
01:11:48,360 --> 01:11:54,020
adjacent is a single-sided lot of a building with a single-sided parking lot.

948
01:11:54,140 --> 01:11:58,560
It's not too opposing with a shared center, so I think there is a bit of a differential

949
01:11:58,560 --> 01:12:02,580
there which creates almost a full of art in the center where the existing sign is.

950
01:12:02,580 --> 01:12:02,800
Yes.

951
01:12:02,960 --> 01:12:03,420
Okay.

952
01:12:05,300 --> 01:12:06,420
We have the motion.

953
01:12:06,620 --> 01:12:07,400
We've been through the findings.

954
01:12:07,560 --> 01:12:09,140
Are we now ready to vote?

955
01:12:10,860 --> 01:12:11,300
Ready to vote.

956
01:12:11,800 --> 01:12:13,600
Grant, would you please roll call for the vote?

957
01:12:13,840 --> 01:12:13,980
Yes.

958
01:12:14,220 --> 01:12:16,620
So this is the motion by Danielson.

959
01:12:16,880 --> 01:12:20,740
Support by me to approve petition 21-11.

960
01:12:23,210 --> 01:12:23,710
Harrison.

961
01:12:24,290 --> 01:12:24,550
Yes.

962
01:12:25,650 --> 01:12:26,110
Kyle.

963
01:12:26,610 --> 01:12:26,770
No.

964
01:12:28,670 --> 01:12:29,190
Danielson.

965
01:12:29,610 --> 01:12:29,850
Yes.

966
01:12:30,670 --> 01:12:31,190
Mead.

967
01:12:31,790 --> 01:12:32,070
No.

968
01:12:32,070 --> 01:12:32,170
No.

969
01:12:33,510 --> 01:12:34,170
And green.

970
01:12:34,370 --> 01:12:34,530
No.

971
01:12:35,210 --> 01:12:36,010
Traditions denied.

972
01:12:38,880 --> 01:12:39,060
All right.

973
01:12:39,320 --> 01:12:42,340
The next item in the agenda this season will be in the old business.

974
01:12:42,540 --> 01:12:42,660
Right.

975
01:12:42,740 --> 01:12:43,180
Do we have any?

976
01:12:43,980 --> 01:12:44,540
We do not.

977
01:12:44,880 --> 01:12:45,060
Okay.

978
01:12:45,800 --> 01:12:46,640
Any public comments?

979
01:12:47,560 --> 01:12:48,540
No public comments?

980
01:12:48,900 --> 01:12:50,200
Any new business?

981
01:12:51,000 --> 01:12:54,540
And do we anticipate what's the deadline for the month of August cases?

982
01:12:54,900 --> 01:12:57,280
So our deadline for the month of August is actually this Friday.

983
01:12:57,500 --> 01:12:59,960
So if we do receive any applications which we have not yet,

984
01:13:00,420 --> 01:13:03,440
we'll let you know whether or not we'll keep that meeting.

985
01:13:03,440 --> 01:13:05,620
or cancel it due to lack of business.

986
01:13:06,140 --> 01:13:07,580
You haven't heard any threats or anything.

987
01:13:08,620 --> 01:13:11,260
No threats or any really specific inquiries.

988
01:13:12,980 --> 01:13:15,440
But sometimes that can change pretty quickly so.

989
01:13:16,700 --> 01:13:19,900
Based on that, just a first comment is glad to be back.

990
01:13:20,540 --> 01:13:20,860
Absolutely.

991
01:13:21,420 --> 01:13:23,120
I'm glad to see everyone this health thing will back

992
01:13:23,740 --> 01:13:25,200
and look forward to continuing.

993
01:13:25,660 --> 01:13:27,480
And based on that, the meeting is adjourned.

994
01:13:27,640 --> 01:13:28,120
Have a good evening.

995
01:13:28,340 --> 01:13:28,400
Great.